Page:English Historical Review Volume 35.djvu/75

 1920 FRANCIS HAVERFIELD 67 evolution of fibula forms he was himself an expert. He was not a professed numismatist, though probably no one has done more to collect records of finds of Roman coins in this country. He kept himself abreast with the results achieved by French and German archaeologists in the dating of Samian ; ^ and, though he did not apply himself to detail, the methods of careful observa- tion which he inculcated have resulted in the establishment of a chronological sequence for the coarser forms of pottery also. Archaeological enterprise in this country is essentially indivi- dualistic. We have no Limes- Kommission to carry on excavation under official auspices. Private enterprise has its bad as well as its good points. Reports of excavations sometimes never see the light. When published they are scattered through the transac- tions of numerous local societies, and this sporadic method of publication makes assimilation of archaeological discoveries difficult for our own scholars, impossible for foreigners. Haver- field saw the need for annual summaries of Roman finds made in Britain. These he contributed for a number of years (1900-13) to the Jahrbuch des K. Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts ; and in 1913, and again in 1914, he read to the British Academy similar papers which have been printed among the supplemental papers of that body. If the results of present-day research are difficult to come by, still more is it difficult to appreciate the collective weight of past discoveries. In the majority of cases these have been due to chance and isolated finds, and, for the most part, they have been unsatisfactorily recorded. There is no way of apprehending the character of a district in Roman times save through regional surveys which shall summarize past finds as well as describe extant remains. In England the only practicable unit for such surveys is the county. The county has been adopted as the basis of archaeological survey by the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, whose work, however, is confined to scheduling existing antiquities. As a member of that commission and chair- man of its Roman sub-committee, Haverfield was responsible for the reports on Roman antiquities in Hertfordshire and Buckinghamshire. The great series of Victoria County Histories still in progress are differently planned. Not only do they give what may be called the archaeological history of every site, but they contain lists of all finds made within the county. Haver- field was a leading contributor to the series. He wrote the chapters on Roman history in the volumes for Norfolk (1901), as an appendix to his ' Mihtary Aspects of Roman Wales ', Transactions of the Hon. Soc. oj Cymmrodorion, 1908-9, pp. 176-83. F2
 * See especially a short paper on the chronology of decorated Samian ware, printed